After reading The Game I became fascinated by the whole world of pick-up and as a result I have read several books by pick-up gurus. Each of these books has offered me very useful information and some of them have been enjoyable to read as well as informative. I recently read "The Natural Art of Seduction" By Richard La Ruina or "Gambler" as he is known. It is a good book, it really has a lot of useful information in it and I thoroughly recommend it to those who eschew canned and scripted material despite it being obvious that Gambler is not a talented writer.

However, there was on instance in the book that REALLY bugged me! He gives several bad response examples typical guys might give upon discovering that the target has been a ballet dancer for ten years. Things like "Oh really? I look football" and other retarded examples like that. Then after this he gives a response from a "Mystery Method Guy" and its kind of like a bad caricature of something The MM might advocate such as "Oh my God, I can't talk to you! The first girl I had a crush on was a ballet dancer!" Or something like that, that in fact, considering this was dealing with rapport building I am almost certain Mystery would not give that response apart from during the attraction phase. But whatever.

But my point is that, not only is this final example completely unnecessary, but the obvious dig at a competitor is really pathetic and it rankled me. You could almost call it a DLV. In The Game, Style talks about the rivalries between Ross Jeffries, Mystery and RSD and whatnot and how he prefers to imbibe information from ALL gurus rather than become the disciple of one true way. This is how it should be, and it disappointed me to see that a well respected PUA such as Gambler would act like this. In fact, there are numerous snide incidents throughout La Ruina's manual that seem to hint that his way is the true one.

Now, one point I would very much like to make is that while La Ruina's book is a good read and contains some new ideas and is definitely good for natural game, I would go as far as to say that up to 60% of his book is recycled from The Mystery Method. Not even kidding, there are so many of his techniques and ideas that are just reworded or repackaged from Mystery Method, which makes his sleight upon Mystery all the more pathetic. Many of the goddamn terms used in the book originated from Mystery.

At this point I know I sound like a huge Mystery fan boy, but I'm honestly not. I understand that the use of canned material is apparently going out of fashion and PU has moved on from a lot of his pioneering work. I don't like using routines like in MM for one thing.

I guess the whole business and money-making aspect of PU sickens me. I have genuinely found learning this has made me a better person, has vastly improved my life and made me happier than I have ever previously been in my whole adult life and I really want to thank this community as well as the gurus for that. But the whole competitive aspect of it is unpleasant, it's reminiscent of religious leaders attempting to force their will upon the people. Okay, that's a dramatic simile but I'm sure you see my point no? This shouldn't be about money, it's about guys helping other guys unlock their potential.

Basically, in closing I suppose the whole point of this rant is that it disappoints me to see childish, snide comments like this from gurus who should have mutual respect for each other imo. What is the point in rubbishing each other? It's just a cynical way of getting more money.

TL;DR: Gambler has a snide dig at Mystery, despite about 60% of his book being the equivalent of copy pasting from The Mystery Method and putting it into his own words. I know he isn't the be-all and end-all and so he shouldn't be, but my point is that there have been numerous times I've skipped sections in various e-books and whatnot after concluding that "I read this ages ago in The Mystery Method."

Testify Brother !!!

_________________
Even the most naturally gifted can learn to become better.

Most of the "gurus" that are out there selling their pick up "advice" are often times worse off with women then those men they try to con out of their money. Their marketers, not ladies men.

On the plus side, there are many guys on this and other related forums who are actually experienced and are willing to help you without trying to con their way into your wallet.

_________________
Never get broken up with again: the-addiction-formula-never-get-broken- ... 88794.html

Yeah, I think a lot of the time when new guys say "I became disillusioned with the established gurus so I came up with my own way" is basically saying "I'm different, pay me."

I suppose Mystery has the added credibility of thousands and thousands of forum posts in an archive that he posted for years as just a hobby. He lacked the initial monetary agenda.

I've never read a method that I couldn't make work. For the past year and a half I've been entirely unmethod based, but have tried just about every method just as an experiment and to test it so I can give honest reviews. I can't stand the rigid structure of MM, but it clearly works for a certain type of guy, and I used to use elements of it. Gambler acts like his is a natural style method, and it is in some ways, but he too over complicates things. Almost all of it comes down to poor self image and anxiety.

It's the reason their are so many methods, because guys can't deal with rejection properly. So they do these challenges trying to be rejected, and they say that teaches them something, but it doesn't, because once they actually get rejected when they really want a girl and are trying to get her, it's going to hurt just as much as it would have if you'd never done those challenges.

So guys end up searching for this perfect method where they won't be bullied by "AMOGS" or rejected ever again. NO SUCH METHOD EXISTS. If you're incapable of coming up with your own shit just use someone else method and learn to deal with rejection and anxiety.

_________________
Even the most naturally gifted can learn to become better.

I think it's kind of easy to tell the ones that are more business related. They have a very specific angle, and De Angelo and Gambler in particular have a method that is very nonoffensive and won't get bad reactions from feminists, conservatives, hardline liberals etc.

_________________
Even the most naturally gifted can learn to become better.